9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 624X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er cent of the Cenvat credit demand - E/2483 OF 2011 - 700 of 2012-EX - Dated:- 18-4-2012 - AJIT BHARIHOKE, RAKESH KUMAR, JJ. Amit Jain for the Appellant. R.K. Verma for the Respondent. ORDER Rakesh Kumar, Technical Member The point of dispute in this case is as to whether the appellant, a manufacturer of filter and filter paper are eligible for Cenvat credit of service tax paid on outdoor catering facility availed by them for providing canteen facility to their workers. There is no dispute that the number of workers in the factory is less than 250 and as such there is no requirement for the appellant to provide canteen service to the workers in terms of the provisions of the Factories Act. The appellant's plea is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of "input service", and that substantial part of the demand is time barred as during the period of dispute, when the Cenvat credit in respect of this service had been availed there were conflicting decisions on this issue and, hence, longer limitation period cannot be invoked for recovery of allegedly wrongly availed credit. He, therefore, pleaded that the impugned order disallowing the Cenvat credit in respect of this service is not correct and that the appellant have a strong prima facie case in their favour and, hence, the requirement of pre-deposit of Cenvat credit demand, interest and penalty may be waived for hearing the appeal and recovery thereof be stayed till the disposal of the appeal. 4. Shri R.K. Verma, ld. Departmental ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... necessary for improving the efficiency of the worker and the same is eligible for cenvat credit in terms of Larger Bench decision in the case of GTC Industries Ltd. ( supra ), there is no dispute about the fact that part of the cost of providing canteen service has been recovered from the workers and to that extent the appellant would not be eligible for the Cenvat credit. Moreover, since the number of workers in the Appellant's factory is admittedly less than 250 and there is no statutory requirement of providing canteen facility to workers, there is also a question to be considered as to whether this activity is a welfare activity, in which case, it would not be eligible for Cenvat credit or this activity is essential for increasing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
